Text Size

-

+

reset

That’s how much the government paid to cover additional costs of borrowing money during the epic debt battle that dominated Washington last summer, as investors grew jittery over the delay. That uncertainty led to higher borrowing costs for the federal government, according to a Government Accountability Office report released Monday.

“Delays in raising the debt limit can create uncertainty in the Treasury market and lead to higher Treasury borrowing costs,” the watchdog agency said. “GAO estimated that delays in raising the debt limit in 2011 led to an increase in Treasury’s borrowing costs of about $1.3 billion in fiscal year 2011.”

But the GAO warned that the borrowing costs could go even higher, since the report doesn’t account for Treasury liabilities that are still outstanding.

The Treasury Department had to take a number of extraordinary measures – such as delaying payments to various retirement and benefits funds – in order to buy Congress more time to work out a debt deal. The debt limit was finally increased in August following the passage of the Budget Control Act, which cut spending by $2.1 trillion and increased the debt limit in multiple phases.

Though it’s difficult to pinpoint exactly when the country will again max out its credit card, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said he expects the nation to reach the limit before the end of the year. But the actual deadline may not be until 2013 since Treasury can again enact extraordinary measures.

The current debt limit stands at $16.4 trillion, while the United States holds more than $15.87 trillion of debt.

Rep. Sander Levin (D-Mich.), the top Democrat on the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, noted Monday that House Republicans have again pledged to tie spending cuts to any debt-limit hikes – a call that Democrats have characterized as another round of fiscal brinksmanship.

“The cost of last summer’s recklessness by Republicans only continues to grow, yet they seem eager to do it all over again,” Levin said in a statement. “It is time for Republicans in Congress to end their constant turn toward rigid ideology and begin learning how to govern.”

When asked by reporters for a response on the report, House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said there needs to be “accountability” on the debt-ceiling issue.

“One thing I found on the debt ceiling, and one of the things that created most of the uncertainty, is the president didn’t want to have any type of debt ceiling discussion in an election year,” McCarthy said Monday. “He was more focused on politics, [it’s] what he’s doing in the tax policy right now as well.”

Readers' Comments (35)

When it comes to the debt ceiling, the debt, the deficit, neither party has any core values concerning this issue. Which ever party control the white house is always for raising the debt ceiling. Republicans and Democrats get off your high horses and just admit it. If the president is from your party, raising the debt limit and spending until the cows come home is just fine. Here are the facts concerning raising the debt limit in the U.S. Senate.

Now we come to 2009 and how things have changed, Democrats who called raising the debt ceiling unpatriotic, who were totally against it are now for it. Republicans who used the same arguments Democrats are now using, changed stripes.

2009 59 Democratic Senators voted for raising the debt Ceiling, no longer unpatriotic, 1 Republican voted to raise it. A new president has been installed in the White House, one President Obama, a Democrat.

2010 60 Democratic senators this time voted to raise the debt ceiling, zero, none, nada, no republicans at all voted to raise the debt ceiling. President was still a democrat by the name of Obama.

Neither party has any core values, just political expedency. If Romney wins in 2012, raising the debt ceiling will become okay again the the Republicans and become unpatriotic once more for the Democrats. It all depends which party controls the white house as it does for so many other issues.

Neither party has any core values, just political expedency. If Romney wins in 2012, raising the debt ceiling will become okay again the the Republicans and become unpatriotic once more for the Democrats. It all depends which party controls the white house as it does for so many other issues.

There's just one clarification I would add to your recitation of the facts, and they are facts.

The GOP took a heavy hit for just the type of activity you rightly called them out on. They claim they learned their lesson because of that rebuke. To date, I haven't seen evidence that they've forgotten that lesson.

I believe it is possible most of the GOP Congress members are truly interested in fiscal responsilibity now; certainly more so than what the Democrats in Congress and the White House have shown us to date.

I believe it is possible most of the GOP Congress members are truly interested in fiscal responsilibity now; certainly more so than what the Democrats in Congress and the White House have shown us to date.

Possible, but I doubt it. The history of the GOP is loaded with rhetoric about fiscal responsibility, a balance budget etc, but running up huge debt. I liked Reagan and vote for him twice, he talked a good game, tried to get the balanced budget amendment and the line item veto to battle the ever amounting debt. But the rhetoric was hollow, he added 1.873 trillion to the debt. Bush the 1st almost equaled Ronnie, but in 4 years adding 1.484 trillion. Clinton a Democrat, came in lower than Bush the 1st, in 8 years he added 1.418 and left a blanced budget in his last year. Bush the 2nd, I can only say, wow, 4.684 trillion in 8 years.

I personally believe fiscal responsibility, by the way the second tenet of a conservative. One of the three tenets every Republican president has failed since Eisenhower, being fiscal responsible basically means a balanced budget or very close to it every year. If it means raising taxes to get there, do it. If it means cutting spending, do it. It could mean a combination of both. Being fiscal responsibe means a lot more than just low taxes. It means getting this country back on solid ground financially before we fall into the abyss of a financial meltdown which I am afraid is very close to happening. I don't trust either party to do this.

These people are sooooo smart that they can see how much the extra perks are costing us without EVER looking at the big elephant in the room. Last time they added $1 Trillion to the ceiling. Well DUH....forgive me for using common sense here but that's pretty much how much it cost US.

It means getting this country back on solid ground financially before we fall into the abyss of a financial meltdown which I am afraid is very close to happening. I don't trust either party to do this.

From all evidence, we stand a better chance with the GOP to reach that goal than with the Progressive Democrat Party. It's not about a matter of trust with me, if given the oppportunity again, the GOP had better follow through, or they face the same treatment they got in 2006.

Wide-ranging U.S. spending cuts set to kick in next year for domestic and military programs would be scrapped by a proposal that some top Republicans plan to outline on Thursday.

Senator John McCain has joined forces with assistant Senate Republican leader Jon Kyl and other party members to introduce legislation that would eliminate the first installment of $1.2 trillion in automatic spending reductions over a decade.

There's just one clarification I would add to your recitation of the facts, and they are facts.

The GOP took a heavy hit for just the type of activity you rightly called them out on. They claim they learned their lesson because of that rebuke. To date, I haven't seen evidence that they've forgotten that lesson.

I believe it is possible most of the GOP Congress members are truly interested in fiscal responsilibity now; certainly more so than what the Democrats in Congress and the White House have shown us to date.

You've got to be kidding... The GOP, right now, is freaking out about making ANY cuts to defense spending, and you somehow believe they "learned their lesson"?

They've spent the last week going all Keynesian and claiming the defense cuts would hurt jobs, but somehow.. someway.. you believe they've learned their lesson?

GOP Fights to Avoid Automatic Defense Cuts Transcript by http://www.newsy.com BY ZACH TOOMBS The $1.2 trillion in cuts triggered by the super committee's failure this week were meant to be automatic, evenly divided between defense and domestic spending. But Republicans in Congress now say the cuts rely too heavily on cutting into the U.S. military. On Sunday, GOP Sen. Pat Toomey, a member of the disbanded super committee, told ABC's This Week that Republicans would work around the defense cuts however possible.

WASHINGTON | Mon Jul 25, 2011 1:33pm EDT (Reuters) - Republicans in the House of Representatives will push legislation to cut $1.2 trillion in spending over 10 years and provide a short-term, $1 trillion increase in the government's borrowing limit, a Republican aide said on Monday. House Speaker John Boehner, who is crafting the legislation, also wants to trigger automatic deficit-reduction cuts if spending exceeds caps created by the legislation, the aide said.

From all evidence, we stand a better chance with the GOP to reach that goal than with the Progressive Democrat Party. It's not about a matter of trust with me, if given the oppportunity again, the GOP had better follow through, or they face the same treatment they got in 2006.

David B.: Jul. 23, 2012 - 7:58 PM EST

He was dealing with a Democrat Congress.

Very true on dealing with a Democratic Congress. This is why I blame both parties, they both have walked hand in hand leading this once great nation to the edge of the cliff. Reagan was very well liked, nothing was written in stone he had to sign what the Democratic congress sent him. Heck, Jimmy Carter veto'ed and fought with his own party over the budget causing 4 government shut downs in 4 years. Reagan had the bully pulpit and he could have used it, that is if he had a mind to.

It is not the political parties I;m worried about. It is the country. I could care less if both the republicans and democrats closed up tents today and went home. We as a nation would probably be better off if they did, especially since both parties are directly responsible for the mess we are in. Either or both could have stood up in the past and said enough is enough. But none did. What you may be proposing is a choice of the lesser of two evils or the least worst candidate. What is the difference my friend, if one party is driving his nation at 150 MPH heading for that cliff and the other at 140 MPH. We are just as dead having gone over that cliff.

Yeap! let's spend more money that we have just the way the Democrats like it because we have all the money in the world to spend and BTW no strings attach. Obummer need to go....

History shows that approximately 8.5 trillion of the debt has been added under Republican presidents, 7.5 and counting under Democratic presidents. Pretty even I would say. Now since every spending bill has to originate in the House of Representatives, Republican Houses are passed 7.9 trillion that was added to the debt and Democratic Houses passed 8.1 trillion. This is even closer. You, Colombian have nothing to talk about when it comes to your party. It is just a guilty as the Democrats.

Neither party comes close to being even reasonable fiscal responsible. Best to do away with both parties and state anew.

Yeap! let's spend more money that we have just the way the Democrats like it because we have all the money in the world to spend and BTW no strings attach. Obummer need to go....

History shows that approximately 8.5 trillion of the debt has been added under Republican presidents, 7.5 and counting under Democratic presidents. Pretty even I would say. Now since every spending bill has to originate in the House of Representatives, Republican Houses are passed 7.9 trillion that was added to the debt and Democratic Houses passed 8.1 trillion. This is even closer. You, Colombian have nothing to talk about when it comes to your party. It is just a guilty as the Democrats.

---------------------

Since you know so much about the Debt, why don't you tell us how much debt Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid accumulated since 2007? After all, they won Congress in 2007 after bashing Republicans for recklessly wasting 2 trillion dollars. Just look at the National Debt in 2007. That should tell you who's been recklessly spending.

But for Curt to say the Obama hasn't been spending money just because the spending has gone from 3.1 Trillion to 3.3 Trillion and say OH LOOK, it's only a 200 Billion dollar difference is pathetic. It's like the 3 TRILLION NEVER EXISTED FOR THESE SOCIALISTS. How pathetic is that!

Stupid Dem's, they could cut the ENTIRE military budget, tax every millionaire and billionaire 100%, and raise taxes to boot, and they probably STILL won't get enough revenue to balance the budget. They're incompetent and irrational.

Since you know so much about the Debt, why don't you tell us how much debt Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid accumulated since 2007? After all, they won Congress in 2007 after bashing Republicans for recklessly wasting 2 trillion dollars. Just look at the National Debt in 2007. That should tell you who's been recklessly spending.

But for Curt to say the Obama hasn't been spending money just because the spending has gone from 3.1 Trillion to 3.3 Trillion and say OH LOOK, it's only a 200 Billion dollar difference is pathetic. It's like the 3 TRILLION NEVER EXISTED FOR THESE SOCIALISTS. How pathetic is that!

2007--2008 the total was 2.902 trillion that the Democratic house originated, passed and Bush II signed into law

2009-2010 the total was 2.881 trillion that the Democratic House originated, passed and Obama signed into law

2011 the total added to the debt was 1.299 trillion originated and passed by a Republican house and Obama signed into law.

I do agree percentage of whatever means little, it is what is being added to the debt that does, think interest on the national debt. 384 billion in 2009, 414 billion in 2010, 454 billion in 2011 and estimated to be at 500 billion for 2012. In two short years just the interest payment on the national debt will become the this nation's largest outlay, the number one and largest item in the budget surpassing defense.

But remember, the Democratic house couldn't have added the 2.9 trillion to the debt for 2007-2008 with out GWB signature. Obama couldn't have added 1.299 trillion to the national debt without a Republican House first originating and authorizing that spending prior to being signed into law by President Obama.